Comments by "thierrydesu" (@thierrydesu) on "History Hustle" channel.

5:56 It's a typical revisionnist assertion. More French soldiers were killed in action in June 1940 than in any month of the Great War. Many cities were bitterly contested, including Lille, where the time gained by the French allowed the British troops to re-embark. The Germans allowed the French to parade with arms in hand after the surrender. The village of Stonne was taken, lost and recaptured several times a day, every day of the battle. The German generals were not mistaken, they who testified to having found among the French the same combativeness as among their predecessors of 1914-1918.
149
@Raph1805 From 1924 to 1939, France was continuously ruled by alliances ranging from the left to the center-right, all claiming pacifism. We saw the result.
14
@captderichelieu2280 Tell this to the 60,000 Germans who lost their life with six weeks.
5
7:14 Why would the French armies have moved? Thanks to the peaceful policies imposed by the left, they had too little heavy equipment, and certainly not enough to invade Germany. The Phoney War made rearmament possible. However, this rearmament came too late. The French armies had not been trained to use tanks and aircraft on a massive scale.
4
6:18 This is further proof that you know nothing about History and are talking nonsense. Or maybe you are a dishonest person? The contribution of American troops was in no way decisive for the victory of 1918. The first Americans were not engaged in combat until May 1918, in small numbers, and from August 1918 in large numbers. They were completely harmless as the French pushed back the German lines everywhere. The French even had to stop their advance and hold their lines for weeks, waiting for the Americans to make the connection after having progressed in the sector which had been assigned to them.
3
0:50 A counter-attack was launched but the British weren't there as they deserted at night without prior notice.
3
8:00 The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was certainly not a non aggression pact. This is only the lie of the left and in no case the historical truth. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was a pact of political, economic and military alliances between Germany and the Soviet Union. The best proof is that the Soviet Union supported the German war effort and the Soviet Union attacked Poland two weeks after Germany did, in agreement with the secret protocols of the Pact that were unveiled in 1990.
2
5:19 If the French were 'stuck to the defensive mentality of WWI', why did French troops enter Belgium to meet German troops?
2
Because millions of civilian fugitives on the roads hindered the movements of the armies. Because there was no point in sacrificing the lives of French soldiers in vain after the cowardly retreat of the British. Because rumour had it that the communists were preparing to seize power. Because without an army, it would not have been possible to maintain a viable French state, to ensure order and security as well as control of the Empire.
2
9:36 It's curious you dare to say the British were convinced the French had lost the will to fight. Remind me who covered up the British's shameful retreat to the sea?
2
9:27 Shame on you who claim that the British did not have the support of the French when it was they who cowardly withdrew without fighting, without prior notice and in defiance of the attack orders of the commander in chief, General Weygand.
2
@Doodle1266 During the interwar period, all center-right and left-wing governments driven by a pacifist ideology did what it took to deprive the French military from any equipment allowing them to make modern warfare. In 1939, the French military did not have a doctrine of mobile warfare because they had never had the opportunity to prepare for it due to lack of equipment. Everything the military had asked for years began to come in 1940, but they did not know exactly what to do with it, having never been able to draw up battle plans based on large numbers of planes, guns, tanks and vehicles. The general will was to avoid having a front running accross French soil, not to carry out frontal attacks and to count on the exhaustion of Germany thanks to the sea blockade.
1
@AA-uh6rp But the British spent the whole war fleeing the Germans, didn't they?
1
8:27 I need to watch a foreign video to hear of an attempt to make an Alsace-Lorraine Soviet Republic. Another point of history the socialists of the French National Education are not proud of and that they prefer the general public know nothing about.
1
5:27 What you call 'Maginot thinking' is just the consequence of the disastrous arms policies of left and center-right governments during the interwar period which deprived the French Army from all heavy equipment, preventing it from facing high-intensity modern warfare.
1